JOHN MCCAIN THE REPUBLICAN CONSERVATIVES LOVE TO HATE

Document Sample
JOHN MCCAIN THE REPUBLICAN CONSERVATIVES LOVE TO HATE Powered By Docstoc
					                        JOHN MCCAIN:
          THE REPUBLICAN CONSERVATIVES LOVE TO HATE
Despite McCain’s effort to reach out to the extreme right of his party, conservatives still do not trust him.
McCain has consistently served as a stumbling block to Republican goals in the Senate since 2000, has been in
opposition to the conservative agenda on campaign finance, tax policy, judicial appointments and immigration.
As a result, conservative leaders refuse to see McCain as something other than a “Republican in name only”
and are already lined up against a McCain run in 2008.

                              CONSERVATIVES DON’T TRUST MCCAIN

McCain’s Opposition to Bush on Torture Could Run Presidential Ambitions “Aground.” The
Washington Post reported that “McCain's bid to position himself as the natural heir to President Bush as a
wartime commander in chief and to court conservative leaders in advance of his likely 2008 presidential
campaign has threatened to run aground in recent days, as the two men clash over how to detain and try
terrorism suspects.” According to the Washington Post, McCain’s opposition to the President on torture “is
likely to carry a long echo -- especially if the senator from Arizona forces Bush to back down.” The Post went
on to note that “some prominent conservatives are branding him a disloyal Republican and an unreliable
conservative because of his assertiveness on the detainee issue,” including Rush Limbaugh who said that
McCain;s opposition to Bush “is going to go down as the event that will result in us getting hit again, and if we
do, and if McCain, et al. , prevail, I can tell you where fingers are going to be pointed.” [Washington Post, 9/19/06]

Union Leader President Joseph McQuaid: McCain Fighting Wrong War. Joseph McQuaid wrote in the
Union Leader questioning McCain’s opposition to Bush in the debate on torture. McQuaid wrote, “in the midst
of the most difficult and challenging war we have ever faced, can the nation afford a President McCain? No
doubt his motives are pure, but McCain's current actions are blocking our ability to gain from terrorist captives
the vital information we need to fight a war in which the enemy strikes us here at home from multiple locations
around the world.” McQuaid reasoned that if McCaon didn’t understand the consequences of his opposition,
“New Hampshire citizens must question why they should support him for President.” [Union Leader, 9/16/06]

SC GOP Chair: South Carolinians Say McCain Wrong to Oppose Bush on Torture. Katon Dawson, the
Republican Party chairman in South Carolina said McCain’s stance was opposite that of the voters he would
need to win the South Carolina primary. Dawson said, “South Carolina is certainly Bush country.
Overwhelmingly, the communications we're getting are supporting the president. Obviously, the president is
right on this issue. I think John McCain thinks he's right - McCain and Warner and Graham. I think people on
the ground think they're wrong.” [The Myrtle Beach Sun-News, 9/16/06]

Conservative Website: McCain Endangering Americans. Jim Kouri, writing for the website The
Conservative Voice, criticized McCain’s stubbornness in the torture debate as endangering American lives.
Kouri wrote, “Senator McCain is stubbornly refusing to define the term "torture" leaving US interrogators
wondering what techniques they are permitted to use in order to extract information from terrorists. He speaks
of moral highground, but doesn't mention that his sanctimonious "moral highground", although playing well in
the newsrooms of the New York Times, may cost some Americans their lives because interrogators weren't
aggressive enough in getting information that proves valuable in thwarting attacks on the US.”
[theconservativevoice.com, 9/19/06]

David Frum: McCain Forfeited Conservatives’ Trust And Cannot Win 08 GOP Primary. Writing for the
American Enterprise Institute, David Frum wrote that McCain’s machinations to appear bipartisan lost him the
electoral trust of conservatives. Frum wrote, “McCain has been performing variations on this same trick for a
decade now: vibrating back and forth between Democrats and Republicans, always to intense media acclaim.
Can a man really become president in this way? Most people assume that the answer is yes. According to this
usual view, maneuvers like this week's only enhance McCain's popularity: They move him far enough away
from Bush to woo moderates and Democrats--but not so far as to alienate the Republican base. Well, maybe.
But there's a catch: Call it the Lieberman catch. McCain's friend and Senate colleague Joe Lieberman likewise
made a career out of vibrating between the parties. Like McCain, Lieberman never really strayed that far from
the Democratic line: He accumulated a strongly liberal voting record, adhering with special fidelity to every last
demand of the environmentalist and civil rights lobbies. But even though he voted liberal, he forfeited liberal
trust. And last month, he forfeited the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senator from Connecticut. Conservative
Republicans likewise do not trust John McCain. And candidates who cannot win the trust of their parties do not
win their parties' primaries.” [aei.org, 9/11/06]

Cato Institute: McCain’s Trip To Louisiana Was “Political Morphing.” “John Samples, director of
representative government at the Cato Institute in Washington, viewed the Louisiana trip as the continued
morphing of McCain. Through the '90s, McCain built his reputation as a tough-talking maverick. In the 2000
presidential primary, he learned the power of the Republican right wing, which knocked him out of the
presidential race in the South Carolina primary. Now McCain is appealing to the party base as his third stage.
McCain's next stage could be as president, Samples said. ‘And we won't know what he really is because he will
have done whatever he needs to do to be president,’ Samples said.Louisiana state Sen. Tom Schedler sees it a
different way. Schedler, chairman of the Senate Republican delegation, contends that McCain just might be the
candidate who could move the Republican base toward the center. ‘It's too early to tell, but he's the kind of
candidate we can win with,’ Schedler said. ‘He can pull over those conservative Democrats. You're going to
have to moderate and McCain offers you that.’” [Advocate, 8/20/06]

McCain’s Was Forced To Defend His Immigration Plan From Attack In South Carolina. “Sounding more
like a presidential contender than a politician come to the aid of South Carolina Republican candidates, Sen.
John McCain talked about national and international issues in a series of appearances in Myrtle Beach[.]” “The
senator was mostly warmly received but some in the public meeting attacked his position on immigration and
on a cooperative agreement with Democratic senators on judge appointments. "Our borders are broken,"
McCain said when the question of immigration came up in the first meeting, asked by chamber president Brad
Dean "I know how many illegals are working in Myrtle Beach," he said. But he said employers can't be
expected to be immigration agents.” [Desert Morning News, 8/20/06]

McCain Had To Defend His Immigration Plan And His Role In The Gang Of 14 In South Carolina.
“There was more anger about the issue in the public meeting. McCain said he understands the anger, but the
issue must be handled and not everyone agrees on how to do it. John Easterling said he approves of legal
immigration but not amnesty for illegal immigrants. "It really isn't fair to call it amnesty," McCain said.
Amnesty means total forgiveness and he favors a program allowing those who have been here long enough to
apply for citizenship if they meet the requirements, he said. Nor should Republicans be tearing each other apart
over immigration, McCain said. "We want to negotiate," he said. "We are patriotic Americans, and for us to
impugn the character of each other over this issue is reprehensible. "As for joining with some Democrats to
prevent filibusters against judicial nominees, which some conservatives see as improper, McCain said it is
"crazy" to think that the Senate can conduct any business without cooperation between the parties. "If you
believe that all we should do is fight and beat down the Democrats, fine," McCain said. But if that were so, no
legislation would pass, he said. "My constituents in Arizona sent me there to get things done," not just to fight
with Democrats, McCain said.” [Desert Morning News, 8/20/06]

McCain Acknowledged There Was “Lingering Resentment” Against Him In Iowa But Emphasized His
Support Of Bush To The Conservative Crowd. “‘Here in Iowa there are parts of the party where there is still
lingering resentment over the bitterness of the 2000 race, so we would have a lot of work to do,’ McCain said,
shrugging off polls that show him a front-runner in 2008. McCain, who also visited the Iowa State Fair and
another fund-raiser in Mason City, emphasized to the crowd in Grinnell his support for Bush's stance in Iraq and
in the war on terrorism, his ability to work across the aisle and his opposition to high congressional spending. ‘I
have supported this president and I'm very happy to do so on most issues including the most important ones, the
war in Iraq and national security issues,’ he said.” [Reuters, 8/15/06]

Iowans Said McCain’s Moderate Stances And 2000 Snub Wouldn’t Be Helpful To His Chances In Iowa
In 2008. “Bill Rozendaal, a small businessman in Grinnell who attended the event, said McCain's tough stance
on national security and restraining spending, along with his bipartisan approach, could overcome inherent
doubts about him among Iowa conservatives. ‘The Republican caucus tends to be fairly conservative, and he is
viewed here as being more moderate. That's not helpful in Iowa,’ said Rozendaal, who is undecided on who he
will support in 2008. ‘But he has a message that will work well in the heartland,’ he said. ‘I like a lot of what I
heard.’ Bill Weeks, a retired businessman in Grinnell, said he was leaning toward supporting McCain but there
was still some hostility in the state about his abandonment of Iowa in 2000. ‘I think there are people who will
hold that against him,’ Weeks said. ‘But if he would spend some time out here he might surprise some people.’”
[Reuters, 8/15/06]

Grover Norquist Called McCain A Flip Flopper Who Would Not Lead With Conservative Values.
During an interview which on ABC News, Grover Norquist, the head of the conservative group Americans for
Tax Reform, said McCain's flip-flopping tendancy would be damaging to conservative goals. Norquist said of
McCain, “What McCain has done is flip-flopped on the gun issue, on the tax issue. He used to be a Reagan
Republican on taxes. He's voted against every one of President Bush's tax cuts. He voted for the first one before
he voted against it but he’s voted against all of them. He's flip-flopped back and forth not because of where the
American people are but because of where the cameras are.” Norquist added that McCain's “phototropism” was
“very damaging from a conservative perspective because that's unlikely to lead to conservative governance.”
[ABC News, 6/11/06]

Conservatives Are Not At Ease With McCain’s Positions, Leading Some To Say, “I Don’t Trust Him.”
“Conservatives say they have such an abiding distrust of McCain’s broader agenda and loyalties that they are
unlikely to embrace him, regardless of the nation’s biggest challenges or the rest of the GOP field for 2008.
‘I’m not at all certain that taking those positions alleviates John [McCain]’s problems with conservatives,’ said
David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union. ‘Sometimes I like him. But I don’t trust him. I
don’t think a lot of conservatives would be mollified that he’s now pressing issues on which they agree. A lot of
conservatives feel he doesn’t like them and that if he were in the position to, he’d be hostile and try to drive
them out of the party.’” [Modesto Bee, 10/16/05]

Concerned Women For America Said McCain’s Independence Was Still A Liability Among
Conservatives. “Michael Bowman, executive director of the political action committee affiliated with
Concerned Women for America, said McCain’s independent streak is still more of a negative as far as
conservatives go. ‘You sometimes need the maverick to carry the legislation when you know your side is
wrong or needs to be corrected,’ Bowman said,…’But most people still believe John McCain cannot win the
primary among Republicans.’” [Modesto Bee, 10/16/05]

Traditional Values Coalition Founder Lou Sheldon Derided McCain’s Disloyalty. McCain’s willingness to
abandon his party and obstruct the Republican agenda is often viewed by the media as a “strength, but [is] a
fatal flaw, too, for many in his own party…’Most conservatives struggle with him,’ said Lou Sheldon, founder
of the Traditional Values Coalition, noting he goes off on his own ‘at the drop of a hat.’” [Kansas City Star,
12/27/05]

Limbaugh Called McCain A RINO And Leader Of The New “Rockefeller Republicans.” “Rush
Limbaugh, denounced Mr. McCain as a ‘Republican in Name Only,’ or RINO. ‘They used to be called
Rockefeller Republicans. It may be better to start calling them McCain Republicans, the McCain wing of the
party,’ the radio host said disdainfully as he skewered GOP lawmakers such as Mr. McCain who oppose drilling
in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.” [New York Sun, 11/28/05]
                CONSERVATIVES FELT BETRAYED BY MCCAIN-FEINGOLD

Pat Robertson Accused McCain Of Doing “A Great Deal Of Harm” To The Christian Coalition Through
Campaign Finance Reform. Speaking in 1999, Pat Robertson expressed his opposition to McCain and his
campaign finance proposal and reasoned that pushing the reforms would lead a loss of support from the right for
McCain. Robertson said, “I think John McCain has done a great deal of harm to grassroots movements like the
Christian Coalition through that McCain Feingold Bill; that was a power grab for the Federal Election
Commission which I thought was just shocking, and I think it’s going to be very hard to mobilize people to
support him. I don’t see him really going too far. Of all the candidates, I think, because of that, his advocacy of
that piece of legislation, which would have just devastated our organization, I think that there won’t be as much
enthusiastic support for him as there might be for others.” [Inside Politics,” CNN, 2/9/99]

McCain’s Campaign Finance Reform Legislation Angered Anti-Abortion Leaders. McCain’s campaign
finance legislation, designed to limit the political power of special interest money, has fueled opposition from
the right of the Republican party. The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) opposed language in his
campaign finance reform bill that would “cripple the pro-life movement” by placing new restrictions on interest
groups’ ability to broadcast political messages, according to NRLC legislative director Douglas Johnson.”
[Arizona Republic, 3/5/98]


     CONSERVATIVES FELT BETRAYED BY VOTES AGAINST BUSH TAX CUTS

McCain Voted Against Bush Tax Cuts, Infuriated And Annoyed Conservatives Who Labeled Him An
“Apostate” To The Party. McCain voted against Bush’s 2001 tax cut proposal because he felt it allowed that
“those who needed it most were getting the least,” as he detailed in a letter to Arizona Republican leaders. The
vote against the Bush tax cuts “annoyed conservatives by his refusal to toe the party line,” reported the Boston
Globe, and, according to the Washington Post, “infuriated conservatives, who see McCain as wandering too far
from his earlier moorings on the right,” which Time said resulted in “making him an apostate to the party’s tax-
cutting faithful.” [McCain Letter to Arizona GOP Precinct Officials, 7/01; Boston Globe, 6/6/01; Washington Post, 1/20/03; Time,
11/15/04]

Club For Growth Named McCain 2001 Senate RINO Of The Year. “McCain was declared the U.S. Senate
RINO of the Year [by the Club For Growth] ‘for voting against final passage of the Bush tax cut and for a key
anti-tax cut amendment by Democratic Leader Tom Daschle; for offering his own amendment that would have
gutted the Bush tax cut; for teaming up with Sen. Edward Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, to push massive
new health-care regulations; and for becoming the chief Republican Senate sponsor of the bill to make all
airport screeners federal employees.’” [Washington Times, 3/29/02]

            CONSERVATIVES FELT BETRAYED BY MCCAIN’s “GANG OF 14”

New York Times: Conservative Leaders Faulted McCain For Leading The “Gang of 14” To Avert The
Nuclear Option On Judicial Nominees. On May 24, 2005, to avert a showdown in the Senate over Federal
judicial appointees, 7 Republican and 7 Democratic Senators met in McCain’s offices to reach a compromise on
which nominees would be appointed and when filibusters would be appropriate. The media dubbed the group
the “Gang of 14,” and McCain was labeled the “chief architect” of the deal. “Mr. McCain’s role in brokering
the [judicial] compromise may have severely ruptured his already strained relations with the party’s
conservative bloc, a group that is critical to winning the presidential nomination, conservatives and some of Mr.
McCain’s supporters said. In fact, some conservative leaders said they were not blaming Dr. Frist for the
leadership’s failure to abolish the filibuster and get up-or-down votes on President Bush’s judicial nominees.
Instead, they placed the fault more with Mr. McCain, the Arizona Republican and one of 14 senators who
helped orchestrate the compromise.” [New York Times, 5/24/05; New York Times, 5/25/05]
Norquist Blamed McCain’s “Gang Of 14” For The Miers Nomination. Grover Norquist, president of
Americans for Tax Reform, wrote of McCain’s involvement in the “gang of 14,” that “[t]he most damaging act
by McCain was his decision to…commit himself to oppose the Republican Party’s efforts to end the filibuster
as a tool to stop conservative judges. McCain, not Chief of Staff Andrew Card, was the father of the Harriet
Miers nomination. If McCain had not stopped Frist from employing the ‘nuclear’ or ‘constitutional’ option, we
would have had another Scalia on the bench by Thanksgiving.” [American Spectator, 12/05]

Gary Bauer Said McCain’s Judicial Compromise Was “A Travesty” And Undercut The President And
Loyal Republicans. Shortly after the “Gang of 14” announcement, Gary Bauer said, “The Republicans who
lent their names to this travesty [the gang of fourteen judicial compromise] have undercut their president as well
as millions of their most loyal voters…Shame on them all.” [Los Angeles Times, 5/24/05]

        •    Bauer Endorsed McCain For President In 2000. On February 16, 2000, Gary Bauer held a press
             conference to declare that McCain was “the best shot [Republicans] have” to win the presidency and
             was “pleased to” endorse McCain’s bid for the White House “with great pride and without any
             hesitation.” [Federal News Service, 2/16/00]

Tom Minnery, Christian Conservative Leader, Called McCain “Unprincipled” Because of His Position
on Judicial Nominations. “Tom Minnery, vice president of public policy at Focus on the Family, an
influential conservative Christian group, denounced Mr. McCain as ‘squirrelly, hard to figure out and
unprincipled,’” following the “Gang of 14” compromise. [New York Times, 5/25/05]

Center For Individual Freedom Labeled McCain A “RINO” And “Spineless” Because of His Position on
Judicial Nominations. The Center for Individual Freedom sent a mass email to supporters, signed by CFIF
President Jeff Mazzella which accused republican senators of being “spineless” and “RINOs,” including
McCain, for joining with Senate liberals to oppose the nuclear option against a judicial filibuster: “The Liberals
have a secret weapon -- namely RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) and spineless GOP Senators…But what is
even more infuriating is that other RINOs have already broken ranks and sided with the opposition. Perennial
thorn in the side -- Senator John McCain -- … ha[s] already stabbed us in the back and ha[s] come out firmly
against the Nuclear Option.” [Center for Individual Freedom Email, 4/05]

          CONSERVATIVES FELT BETRAYED BY MCCAIN ON IMMIGRATION

GOP Base Suspicious of McCain and Border Security. According to the American Spectator, "the biggest
sign of strain in the relationship between McCain and his fan base is clearly immigration." While in Memphis
for the Southern Republican Leadership Conference, “immigration was a hot topic,” and McCain’s partnership
with Kennedy aligned him with “the man Republicans most love to hate.” House Republican Dana
Rohrabacher criticized McCain's stance, saying "[those] diluting the efforts of border-security and internal
enforcement are telling the American people exactly whose side they are on, and it's the wrong side," and added
that "McCain and others will find out about that when they find their own career short-termed because of the
issue." [Investor’s Business Daily, 3/16/06; Los Angeles Times, 5/17/06; The American Spectator, 4/11/06; Arizona Republic,
4/21/06, 4/22/06]

Bilbray Said McCain Was “Dead Wrong” On Immigration And Told Him Not To Come To A Scheduled
Fundraiser At The Request Of The NRCC. Prior to McCain’s scheduled fundraising appearance with
Bilbray, Bilbray “told McCain’s staff that McCain is ‘dead wrong on the amnesty issue,’ and a number of the
people who attended the Wednesday breakfast were prepared to tell the senator the same thing, Bilbray said.
Had McCain come, Bilbray said, it would have put him in the position of ‘maybe having to protect the senator
from reaction here in San Diego.’” McCain “had planned to fulfill his commitment” to appear at the fundraiser,
and the idea to disinvite McCain came from the NRCC, which “suggested McCain’s presence would not be
helpful” in winning the campaign. [North County Times, 5/31/06; Chicago Sun Times, 6/11/06]
After McCain Campaigned For Him, Representative Steve Chabot Said He Couldn’t Support McCain’s
“Amnesty” Proposal Without First Securing The Border. “McCain campaigned on Tuesday for a
conservative congressman who publicly disagreed with the potential 2008 presidential candidate on how to deal
with illegal immigration. Six-term Rep. Steve Chabot made it clear that while he welcomed McCain's
appearance at a breakfast fundraiser, the two are on opposite sides on how to deal with the nation's estimated 11
million illegal immigrants. "This happens to be an area where the senator and I don't agree," Chabot said after
McCain attended the fundraiser for the Ohio congressman's re-election campaign. Chabot said they do agree on
some issues … "I support the House bill," Chabot said. "I think it's a mistake for us to even consider anything
like a temporary worker program, or some people call it amnesty, until we have border control." The public
disagreement between Chabot and McCain reflect the deep divisions within the Republican Party over
immigration. It also highlighted the political reality that McCain, in weighing another White House bid, is
reaching out to all factions of the GOP.” [AP, 4/12/06]

McCain-Kennedy Immigration Reform Highlighted A Pattern Of Apostasy Which Drew Increased
Opposition From The Conservative Base Who Labeled It “Anathema.” “The problem for McCain is that
he has such a richly layered history of apostasy…for instance the enforcement-less immigration bill he is co-
sponsoring with Ted Kennedy,” a proposal to which conservatives are “more opposed to” than that from Bush,
because it “would go even further than Bush by offering a path to permanent status if illegals pay fines and back
taxes, learn English and American civics and meet other requirements,” which are “ideas that are anathema to
many conservatives.” [National Review, 9/27/05; Congressional Quarterly, 11/5/05; National Journal, 10/1/05]

McCain-Kennedy Immigration Reforms Screamed “Amnesty” To Conservatives, Who Then Screamed
Back At McCain In Opposition. “Conservatives who have railed against the Bush [immigration] plan as a
thinly disguised amnesty…find even more to object about in the Kennedy-McCain bill…[because] it shows an
even friendlier face to illegality,” which prompted “[v]arious GOP conservatives, including the magazine
National Review, [to] denounce McCain’s [immigration reform] proposal as an ‘amnesty’ for lawbreakers.”
The conservative backlash to McCain’s immigration proposal reared its head when “McCain faced tough
questions at a town hall meeting Thursday night [August 25, 2005] in Mesa, where conservatives accused him
of going soft on illegal immigrants. ‘No amnesty!’ some shouted…Conservatives say no better word describes
allowing illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S.” [Chicago Sun Times, Editorial, 12/2/05; Roll Call, 10/6/05; Associated
Press, 8/27/05]

McCain-Kennedy Immigration Reform Highlighted A Pattern Of Apostasy Which Drew Increased
Opposition From The Conservative Base Who Labeled It “Anathema.” “The problem for McCain is that
he has such a richly layered history of apostasy…for instance the enforcement-less immigration bill he is co-
sponsoring with Ted Kennedy,” a proposal to which conservatives are “more opposed to” than that from Bush,
because it “would go even further than Bush by offering a path to permanent status if illegals pay fines and back
taxes, learn English and American civics and meet other requirements,” which are “ideas that are anathema to
many conservatives.” [National Review, 9/27/05; Congressional Quarterly, 11/5/05; National Journal, 10/1/05]

McCain-Kennedy Immigration Reforms Screamed “Amnesty” To Conservatives, Who Then Screamed
Back At McCain In Opposition. “Conservatives who have railed against the Bush [immigration] plan as a
thinly disguised amnesty…find even more to object about in the Kennedy-McCain bill…[because] it shows an
even friendlier face to illegality,” which prompted “[v]arious GOP conservatives, including the magazine
National Review, [to] denounce McCain's [immigration reform] proposal as an ‘amnesty’ for lawbreakers.”
The conservative backlash to McCain’s immigration proposal reared its head when “McCain faced tough
questions at a town hall meeting Thursday night [August 25, 2005] in Mesa, where conservatives accused him
of going soft on illegal immigrants. ‘No amnesty!’ some shouted…Conservatives say no better word describes
allowing illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S.” [Chicago Sun Times, Editorial, 12/2/05; Roll Call, 10/6/05; Associated
Press, 8/27/05]
Liberals And Conservatives In New Hampshire Were Angry With McCain On Immigration. “There is
love for McCain in New Hampshire, but there is also opposition, both from liberals and conservatives
expressing a seething, sometimes shockingly crude anger over McCain's stance on immigration.” [The American
Spectator, 4/11/06]


    CONSERVATIVES FELT BETRAYED BY MCCAIN VOTE ON GAY MARRIAGE

McCain Voted Opposite His Party Against An Amendment To Define Marriage As Between One Man
And One Woman; Falwell Called It “Political Suicide” And Buchanan Called McCain “Out Of Step”
With The GOP. Saying that “Most Americans are not yet convinced that their elected representatives or the
judiciary are likely to expand decisively the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples,” McCain was
one of 7 Republicans who voted against the Marriage Protection Amendment, which would have sought to
define marriage as being between one man and one woman, in opposition to all but six other Republicans.
Speaking about the vote, Jerry Falwell said, “it’s my opinion that anyone in the Senate running on the national
level will be committing political suicide by voting against it.” Patrick Buchanan, in writing that McCain was
“out of step with his party and country,” said that “to the Christian base of the party, protection of marriage is
an imperative if we are to slow America's slide into decadence.” [AP, 6/7/06; Senate vote #163, S.J.Res.1, 6/7/06, failed
49-48, McCain “Nay;” Richmond Times Dispatch, 6/6/06; San Jose Mercury News, 6/11/06]


            CONSERVATIVE OPPOSITION IN IOWA AND SOUTH CAROLINA

Conservative Leaders In Iowa Were Angered By McCain’s Efforts In The Judicial Compromise And
Said It Would Be Reflected In The 2008 Caucuses. Kim Lehman, the president of the Iowa Right to Life
Committee compared McCain to GOP turncoat Senator Jeffords, saying, “John Jeffords McCain. It’s real
simple. McCain’s a traitor to the Republican Party now, just like Jim Jeffords was.” Steve Scheffler, president
of the Iowa Christian Coalition added that Iowans in 2008 would have a “long memory and little patience for
‘Republicans who oppose George Bush’s judges.’…We’ll educate people in the caucuses, and this is not going
to do [those senators] a lot of good in terms of their presidential aspirations.” Chuck Hurley, of the Iowa
Family Policy Center, reasoned that the act would hurt McCain in 2008, saying, “I think McCain is going to
suffer…I think he meant well, but it will be proven to be a mistake.” The Los Angeles Times reported that
activists in early primary states had already mobilized against McCain, noting that “Although McCain was
never the darling of religious conservatives, his role in crafting the [gang of 14] compromise will probably
antagonize them further. Social conservatives in Iowa and New Hampshire have issued letters opposing any
compromise on the issue.” [CNN, 5/24/05; Associated Press, 5/24/05; Los Angeles Times, 5/24/05]

Republicans Said McCain Would "Get No Help," "Suffer" And Have An "Impossible Time" Winning In
Iowa As A Result Of The Judicial Compromise. The Los Angeles Times reported that activists in early
primary states had already mobilized against McCain, noting that “Although McCain was never the darling of
religious conservatives, his role in crafting the [gang of 14] compromise will probably antagonize them further.
Social conservatives in Iowa and New Hampshire have issued letters opposing any compromise on the issue.”
[Los Angeles Times, 5/24/05]

        IOWA RIGHT TO LIFE: Kim Lehman, the president of the Iowa Right to Life Committee compared
        McCain to GOP turncoat Senator Jeffords, saying, “John Jeffords McCain. It's real simple. McCain's a
        traitor to the Republican Party now, just like Jim Jeffords was.” [CNN, 5/24/05]

        IOWA CHRISTIAN COALITION: “‘They won't get any help from us. None,’ said Norman Pawlewski,
        of the Iowa Christian Coalition. 'We busted our hump to get a president who would appoint judges who
        would be more just. Republican senators betrayed us.'” . . . [Associated Press, 5/24/05]
           REPRESENTATIVE STEVE KING OF IOWA: 'I think they're going to have an impossible time
           explaining that to the Iowa caucus-goer - particularly John McCain and Lindsay Graham,' said Rep.
           Steve King, R-Iowa. 'Both of them have been mentioned as possible candidates, but I think it's over for
           them in Iowa.'" [AP, 5/24/05]

           IOWA FAMILY POLICY CENTER: Chuck Hurley, of the Iowa Family Policy Center, reasoned that
           the [judicial compromise] would hurt McCain in 2008, saying, “I think McCain is going to suffer…I
           think he meant well, but it will be proven to be a mistake.” [Associated Press, 5/24/05]

Conservative Leaders In Iowa Hate McCain. “Conservatives were unhappy with McCain's role in brokering
a Senate deal last year that averted a showdown over Bush's judicial nominations and the Senate's own rules on
filibusters. "I know a lot of conservatives who were very upset with that because they wanted a showdown,
they wanted the filibuster rule on presidential opponents abolished," said Chuck Hurley, who heads the Iowa
Family Policy Center. Popma agreed, arguing that ending the Democrats' ability to filibuster judicial
nominations could have cleared the way for more conservative judges who might overturn Roe v. Wade, the
landmark Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion. Scheffler and others also cited McCain's push for the
2002 campaign finance law that imposes limits on campaign spending by interest groups. "His involvement in
that has caused huge problems for us," Scheffler said. "It muzzles groups like ours," Hurley said. Other
conservatives expressed reservations about McCain's work with Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., to produce
compromise legislation that would create a path for undocumented immigrant workers to earn citizenship.
McCain also has been on the other side of Iowa proponents of ethanol, the fuel derived from crops such as corn.
Hurley hasn't forgotten McCain's clash with religious conservatives during the 2000 campaign, when he labeled
some "evil." "I don't think Christian leaders who urge people to vote biblically, I don't think that's an evil
influence," Hurley said. "To me that statement by McCain is an extreme slap in the face to my faith."” [AP,
4/13/06]

Iowans Resented McCain For 2000 Snub. “McCain's [2000 Iowa] strategy had created resentment. ‘I think
that Iowans feel that everybody should come here and compete, and I understand that,’ he said. … Steve
Scheffler, who heads the Iowa Christian Alliance (formerly the Christian Coalition of Iowa), predicted that
McCain will never win the hearts or votes of the bulk of religious conservatives. "I don't think he's going to get
anywhere," Scheffler said. …Scheffler said many religious conservatives will be looking at other issues in
judging McCain. Scheffler noted that McCain's team had not yet responded to an invitation to appear at a house
party with religious conservatives. Scheffler also pointed to the upcoming Senate vote on a constitutional
amendment barring same-sex marriages. He said that if McCain opposes the amendment, as he did before, that
would be ‘political suicide.’” [Washington Post, 4/14/06]

Former SC GOP Chair Doesn’t Trust McCain. “Former state GOP chairman Dan Ross of Blackville said
Allen is going to be a favorite in South Carolina. “He’s saying a lot of what people want to hear.” And
McCain? “I don’t trust him,” he said.” [The State, 4/16/06]

South Carolina Social Conservatives Seek Alternative To McCain. “Leading social conservatives in the
S.C. Republican Party are seeking an alternative to U.S. Sen. John McCain of Arizona for the GOP’s 2008
presidential nomination. … “I’ll never support John McCain,” said Drew McKissick, a Columbia-based
political consultant and a member of the Christian Coalition. “He’s not a reliable conservative…I’ll be doing all
I can to run this ‘Straight Talk Express’ off the road.” … “I can’t stomach him,” said Dan Richardson, a
grassroots activist from Greenwood.” [The State, 4/16/06]
    CONSERVATIVES ARE ALREADY OPENLY OPPOSING A MCCAIN ‘08 RUN

President Of Family Research Council Said McCain Would Get No Support From Social Conservatives
For A Presidential Run Because Of The Judicial Compromise. “Tony Perkins [president of the Family
Research Council,] said that he and other conservative activists would like to ‘interview some of the candidates’
sometime this fall and determine whether a single candidate [for president] merits their support. Not on the
activist’s list, despite a conservative voting record that includes opposition to abortion rights in most cases, is
John McCain. The Arizona senator’s prominent role in the recent ‘Gang of 14’ compromise on judicial
nominees helped ‘snatch defeat from the jaws of victory,’ Perkins said. McCain, a maverick, ‘is in a category all
by himself,’ Perkins said. ‘I also do not see him getting any support from social conservatives.’” [Baltimore Sun,
6/16/05]

Pat Robertson Pledged Not To Vote For McCain In 2008, But Offered To Support Giuliani Despite Social
Differences. Asked by ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos “If the [Republican] party chooses a moderate like
John McCain or Rudy Giuliani [as the 2008 nominee], do you think religious conservatives will split off and
form a third party movement,” Pat Robertson responded, saying, “I don’t think so. Rudy is a very good friend of
mine…I think he’d make a good president…although he doesn’t share all of my particular point of view on
social issues.” Robertson continued, “McCain I’d vote against under any circumstance.” [ABC News, 5/1/05]

Limbaugh Questioned McCain’s Conservative Credentials, Opposed To McCain For 2008. In 2006,
conservative radio personality Rush Limbaugh, when asked his opinion about the possible republican
presidential nominee in 2008 said, “A number of people think it will be McCain, I hope not… I don’t think he’s
conservative, pure and simple.” [Desert Sun, 1/21/06]

Lobbyists, Activists and Religious Leaders Lined Up Against A 2008 McCain Run Following The Judicial
Compromise. “Negotiator John McCain, R-Ariz., may have gained some more motivated foes for his possible
presidential run in 2008. One conservative lobbyist said McCain had ‘committed suicide’ for his presidential
aspirations. Another activist said religious conservatives may not have to do much work to squelch another
McCain bid in the Republican primaries. ‘McCain and other aspirants to the Republican nomination need to
remember that Democrats, liberals and media types don’t vote in Republican primaries. Republicans do,’ said
Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, the nation’s largest Protestant denomination.” [Congressional
Quarterly, 5/24/05]

Limbaugh Questioned McCain’s Conservative Credentials, Opposed To McCain For 2008. In 2006,
conservative radio personality Rush Limbaugh, when asked his opinion about the possible republican
presidential nominee in 2008 said, “A number of people think it will be McCain, I hope not… I don't think he's
conservative, pure and simple.” [Desert Sun, 1/21/06]

Lobbyists, Activists and Religious Leaders Lined Up Against A 2008 McCain Run Following The Judicial
Compromise. “Negotiator John McCain, R-Ariz., may have gained some more motivated foes for his possible
presidential run in 2008. One conservative lobbyist said McCain had ‘committed suicide’ for his presidential
aspirations. Another activist said religious conservatives may not have to do much work to squelch another
McCain bid in the Republican primaries. ‘McCain and other aspirants to the Republican nomination need to
remember that Democrats, liberals and media types don't vote in Republican primaries. Republicans do,’ said
Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, the nation's largest Protestant denomination.” [Congressional
Quarterly, 5/24/05]

GOP Activists Questioned McCain’s Conservative Credentials. “Republican Party activists who dominate
the nomination process are increasingly wondering if Sen. John McCain of Arizona, thought to be the early
front-runner, is really conservative enough to satisfy them. There is already a whispering campaign underway to
revive criticisms that McCain is short-tempered and a loose cannon. Many conservatives are still unhappy with
McCain's past criticisms of Christian conservative leaders and his maverick ways on campaign finance reform
and other issues. Still, McCain generally is at or near the top of the pack in early polls for the GOP presidential
nomination.” [U.S. News and World Report, 3/6/06]

McCain Not The GOP Choice “By A Long Shot.” Dick Morris wrote that McCain “is destined to find that his
love of the Republican Party will be unrequited. His dismal showing in the recent Nashville straw poll
underscores the fact that while he is the Democrats’ and independents’ favorite Republican, he’s not the
Republicans’ top choice by a long shot.” Morris goes on to note that McCain as a front runner is actually “a
place to store voter preferences while the other candidates for the nomination break through their low thresholds
of name recognition.” [The Hill, 3/15/06]

Buckley Not Impressed With McCain, Questioned His Consistency. Mr. Buckley suggested that he was less
than impressed with the current group of potential candidates for 2008, saying, ‘I don't find a commanding
presence sort of knocking on the door’ for the next presidential campaign. Senator John McCain of Arizona, a
potential Republican candidate, is ‘a remarkable human being,’ Mr. Buckley said. ‘I don't think that his name
comes to mind automatically as somebody who over a period of years has addressed problems with fruitful
thinking, let alone with consistent thinking.’” [New York Times, 4/5/06]